BOARD DATE: 27 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000674 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ____x____ ___x_____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 27 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000674 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. ______________x___________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. BOARD DATE: 27 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000674 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show his character of service as honorable or medical vice uncharacterized. 2. The applicant states he entered the service with a preexisting knee condition (referred to as existing prior to service (EPTS)). The Army turned down his first attempt, but he was called back to try again. The Army accepted him the second time. During training, his knee began to swell and he could no longer function. He was discharged, but was told the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) would cover medical care for his knee because he had been called to join. He has been unable to obtain VA medical benefits because his service is uncharacterized. 3. The applicant provides: * U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 23 January 1984 * Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History), dated 23 January 1984 * Standard Form 603 (Health Record – Dental), undated * DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the United States), dated 8 February 1984 * DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) * Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center Engineer and Fort Leonard Wood, Order 116-1, dated 25 April 1984 * DD Form 214 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 March 1984. 3. The DA Form 4707 (Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings) confirms an EPSBD met on 5 April 1984 to evaluate the applicant's fitness for service based on a pre-existing condition of status post-realignment procedure for recurrent dislocation of the left patella (kneecap) with residual symptoms of pain and retinacular laxity (looseness in one of the groups of tendons at the knee). The EPSBD determined the applicant failed to meet medical procurement standards and accordingly recommended his separation from the U.S. Army under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-11, due to not meeting procurement medical fitness standards. 4. On 11 April 1984, the EPSBD findings were approved. On 20 April 1984, the applicant concurred with the proceedings and requested discharge from the U.S. Army without delay. 5. On 24 April 1984, the separation authority approved the EPSBD recommendation for the applicant's separation. On 26 April 1984, the applicant was discharged accordingly. 6. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 month and 6 days of creditable active duty service. His DD Form 214 also shows in: * item 24 (Character of Service) – Uncharacterized * item 25 (Separation Authority) – AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-11 * item 26 (Separation Code) – JFT * item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – Did Not Meet Procurement Medical Fitness Standards – No Disability REFERENCES: 1. AR 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), in effect at the time, established the Army Physical Disability System and set forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that were applied in determining whether, because of physical disability, a Soldier was unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. a. It stated that, per accepted medical principles, certain abnormalities and residual conditions exist that, when discovered, lead to the conclusion that they must have existed or have started before the individual entered the military service. Examples are congenital malformations and hereditary conditions or similar conditions in which medical authorities are in such consistent and universal agreement as to their cause and time of origin that no additional confirmation is needed to support the conclusion that they existed prior to military service. b. Soldiers who are found to be unfit by reason of a physical disability, neither incurred nor aggravated by service, will be separated for physical disability without entitlement to benefits. 2. Department of Defense Instruction 1332.38 (Physical Disability Evaluation), in effect at the time, stated service members who are identified with nonwaivered medical conditions or physical defects that EPTS may be administratively separated without referral into the Physical Disability Evaluation System when the medical impairment: * was identified prior to or within 180 days of the member's initial entry on active duty * did not meet accession standards 3. AR 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of active duty enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-11 specifically provided that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty, active duty for training, or initial entry training were to be separated. a. A medical proceeding conducted by an EPSBD was required, regardless of the date completed, to establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within 6 months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty. Additionally, the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at the time of enlistment. b. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision will normally be honorable, but will be shown as uncharacterized if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty service prior to the initiation of separation action (i.e. in an entry-level status). DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends his uncharacterized discharge should be changed to honorable or medical. 2. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was separated while still in an entry-level status based on a medical condition after undergoing an evaluation by an EPSBD. 3. The evidence shows the EPSBD findings and recommendations were approved. The applicant agreed with the board's findings and requested immediate discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Given the applicant was in an entry-level status at the time of his discharge, his service was uncharacterized as required by regulation. 4. The applicant is advised that an uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means the Soldier did not serve on active duty long enough for the Soldier's character of service to be rated. 5. Granting veterans' benefits is not within the purview of the ABCMR. Questions regarding eligibility for benefits are best addressed by the VA. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000674 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000674 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2